Edmund Inundated By Animals?

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

"Steve Hix" <sehix RemoveThis @NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID> wrote in message
news:sehix-AE4907.19125501022006@news.isp.giganews.com...
> In article <Ly2Ef.44589$mu.14683@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
> "nemo" <nemo RemoveThis @newtylust.nit> wrote:
> >
> > Dubbaya's just been on the News here with the bit from his State of the
> > Onion Address where he tries to speak very sternly about Iran, and as
usual,
> > he made an utter farce of it by saying 'nucular' twice in as many
sentences!
>
> The same pronunciation used by a former U.S. President, Mr. Carter, who
> just happened to have a graduate degree in nuclear engineering.
>
> Two of my university physics professors worked on the Manhattan Project
> during WW2, both of them working at Oak Ridge, TN.
>
> One of them invariably pronounced the word as "nucular". It's a southern
> pronunciation variant.

<cop-out alert!>
It's not a variant! It's a mistake - and a damned silly one! Sounds
absolutely sputid!

>
> > Are we really supposed to take this clown seriously?
>
> Why should we take you seriously when you get completely wrapped around
> the axle on a utterly trivial issue?
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

In article <Q9oEf.238703$D47.126507@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, nemo says...
>
>
>"Steve Hix" <sehix.RemoveThis@NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID> wrote in message
>news:sehix-AE4907.19125501022006@news.isp.giganews.com...
>> In article <Ly2Ef.44589$mu.14683@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
>> "nemo" <nemo.RemoveThis@newtylust.nit> wrote:
>> >
>> > Dubbaya's just been on the News here with the bit from his State of the
>> > Onion Address where he tries to speak very sternly about Iran, and as
>usual,
>> > he made an utter farce of it by saying 'nucular' twice in as many
>> >sentences!

>> The same pronunciation used by a former U.S. President, Mr. Carter, who
>> just happened to have a graduate degree in nuclear engineering.

>> Two of my university physics professors worked on the Manhattan Project
>> during WW2, both of them working at Oak Ridge, TN.

>> One of them invariably pronounced the word as "nucular". It's a southern
>> pronunciation variant.

><cop-out alert!>
>It's not a variant! It's a mistake - and a damned silly one! Sounds
>absolutely sputid!


Why do you care?

If the people saying it are demonstrably *not* sputid, nor stupid either,
but are recognized experts in the field, then why do you care if it *sounds*
stupid? Either your "sounds stupid" meter needs recalibrating, or the whole
idea of "sounds stupid" is itself stupid.

Either way, I'd rather listen to, and have the decisions made by, the people
who merely sound stupid, than the ones who genuinely are so but have mastered
the art of Not Sounding Stupid.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*schillin@spock.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

<darylgene.RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1138892909.987214.295990@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > <cop-out alert!>
> > It's not a variant! It's a mistake - and a damned silly one! Sounds
> > absolutely sputid!
>
>
> Get over it.
>

It's offence too high to get over!
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:12:51 -0800, Tim Bruening
<tsbrueni.RemoveThis@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:

>Imaginary Edmund dialogue:
>
>Spoilers For The Movie "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" (based on
>
>the book by C.S. Lewis)

/snip/

>King Edmund: Oh, bother! That lion I marked on a few weeks ago has gone
>and told his friends that I gave him a badge of honor!

Now, that's Lewisian! Fits right in with the lion who went around saying
"He said 'us lions'!"


>Now I have
>Talking Beasts,

Some of the Talking Beasts might do what you say.

>Dwarfs, Giants, Centaurs, Satyrs, and Fauns lined up all
>around the castle waiting for me to draw glasses and mustaches on them!

I don't think these creatures would, because they're part human. Well, the
Giants might. But the Fauns read books like IS MAN A MYTH? and the Centaurs
were very wise and learned (see PRINCE CASPIAN).



Bree
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:25:27 -0500, Forge
> <forge.TakeThisOut@diespammers.youneedageek.com> wrote:
>

>
> The trouble is, he's about the worst in regards to cronyism. He
> surrounds himself with cronies and believes they are representive of
> America.

JFK made his brother Attorney General, Who do you think represents
America, Teddy?
You think Condie is a crony? Likely anyone more conservative than Nancy
Pelosi is to be considered a crony.


> But his original decision to get his public image worked better than
> anything the Democrats came up with. Image is everything.

Have you heard Al Gore lately? THANK HEAVEN he was never president.

> After he won once, the Democrats thought it was a fluke, and didn't
> come up with a way to beat him. I hope to God that they have learned
> to not underestimate the opposition next time. They might not need
> to, as the unholy alliance between the Religious Right

as opposed to the atheistic Left? I guess bigotry is ok if it comes
from that side of the isle.



and Big
> Business can't last too long, and whomever runs for president for the
> Republicans next time might not be any smarter than the Democrats.

But hopefully he will not be filled with their vitriol and venom.
Anyone that watched the Supreme Court hearings realizes that the Dems.
want Bush to fail so badly they would be willing to assinate their
mothers if that would do the trick. It isn't a policy thing anymore, to
them it's personal hatred. I feel sorry for them.

Daryl
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

On 2 Feb 2006 23:28:16 -0800, "darylgene@aol.com" <darylgene DeleteThis @aol.com>
wrote:

>> The trouble is, he's about the worst in regards to cronyism. He
>> surrounds himself with cronies and believes they are representive of
>> America.
>
>JFK made his brother Attorney General, Who do you think represents
>America, Teddy?

I said "about".

>You think Condie is a crony? Likely anyone more conservative than Nancy
>Pelosi is to be considered a crony.

She's sort of a special case as an old maid "married" to her boss.
Same thing as a crony though.

>> After he won once, the Democrats thought it was a fluke, and didn't
>> come up with a way to beat him. I hope to God that they have learned
>> to not underestimate the opposition next time. They might not need
>> to, as the unholy alliance between the Religious Right
>
>as opposed to the atheistic Left? I guess bigotry is ok if it comes
>from that side of the isle.

I don't get what you're asking. Big Business and the Religious Right
have very different needs and goals. They got together to beat the
left, but they aren't natural allies.

>But hopefully he will not be filled with their vitriol and venom.
>Anyone that watched the Supreme Court hearings realizes that the Dems.
>want Bush to fail so badly they would be willing to assinate their
>mothers if that would do the trick. It isn't a policy thing anymore, to
>them it's personal hatred. I feel sorry for them.

This has been the way this has worked for some time now. Both sides
have similar vitriol. Actually the most inclusive candidate for
president might be a Republican (John McCain) - which is the
Democrats' fault, for not having a better candidate. But I suspect
the next president will be as usual - the team which is less
associated with the North.
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

Howard Brazee wrote:
> On 2 Feb 2006 23:28:16 -0800, "darylgene@aol.com" <darylgene DeleteThis @aol.com>
> wrote:
>

>
> She's sort of a special case as an old maid "married" to her boss.
> Same thing as a crony though.

And who could Bush pick that you wouldn't consider a crony?


> >> After he won once, the Democrats thought it was a fluke, and didn't
> >> come up with a way to beat him. I hope to God that they have learned
> >> to not underestimate the opposition next time. They might not need
> >> to, as the unholy alliance between the Religious Right
> >
> >as opposed to the atheistic Left? I guess bigotry is ok if it comes
> >from that side of the isle.
>
> I don't get what you're asking. Big Business and the Religious Right
> have very different needs and goals. They got together to beat the
> left, but they aren't natural allies.

I object to the term "religious right" as if every evangelical were a
non-person who fit some NY Times stereotype, as if they were a sort of
conservative "Frito Bandito"

> >But hopefully he will not be filled with their vitriol and venom.
> >Anyone that watched the Supreme Court hearings realizes that the Dems.
> >want Bush to fail so badly they would be willing to assinate their
> >mothers if that would do the trick. It isn't a policy thing anymore, to
> >them it's personal hatred. I feel sorry for them.
>
> This has been the way this has worked for some time now. Both sides
> have similar vitriol.

Then what happened with Breyer and Ginsberg? Most conservatives didn't
hate Kerry they just didn't agree with him. I think you are wrong. I
think the vitriol is much more potent on the Left.


>Actually the most inclusive candidate for
> president might be a Republican (John McCain) - which is the
> Democrats' fault, for not having a better candidate. But I suspect
> the next president will be as usual - the team which is less
> associated with the North.

I could vote for our senator, Dianne Feinstein, for president and maybe
Joe Lieberman, but we're likely to get Clinton or someone to the left
of her. Most Democrats are just scary to me and a lot of other people.
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

Howard Brazee wrote:

>
> I suspect you are on the right. People in general accuse the other
> side of being hateful. The fans of the other team are hateful.

In the early sixties the climate was considerably different. We
could have both Communists and members of the John Birch Society to
speak on our campus, it ruffled a few feathers but that was all. Who on
the right, that holds any kind of responsible position, sounds like
Dean or Gore or Kennedy?


> The reason the other political side is against me is because they are
> hateful - because, obviously if they thought about it they would agree
> with me. 8^)


It is possible to disagree (we do it here) and not attack the integrity
of the person you dissagree with. It is possible to believe they are
wrong while still accepting that they do desire good ends. Naturally
one thinks their point of view correct, and that thoughtful people
would agree with them, but you can have deep disagreements without
personal malice. Like I said, I know of no one who really felt hatred
of Kerry though they disagreed with him. Having said my piece, and
respecting your right to respond, I will conclude here, this is really
not the forum for this sort of discussion.

Daryl
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

On 4 Feb 2006 22:33:11 -0800, "darylgene@aol.com" <darylgene DeleteThis @aol.com>
wrote:

>> I don't get what you're asking. Big Business and the Religious Right
>> have very different needs and goals. They got together to beat the
>> left, but they aren't natural allies.
>
>I object to the term "religious right" as if every evangelical were a
>non-person who fit some NY Times stereotype, as if they were a sort of
>conservative "Frito Bandito"

There are Democrats with strong religious beliefs. There are
evangelicals who aren't Religious Right. Which is a good reason to
have a separate term.
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

On 4 Feb 2006 22:33:11 -0800, "darylgene@aol.com" <darylgene.TakeThisOut@aol.com>
wrote:

>> This has been the way this has worked for some time now. Both sides
>> have similar vitriol.
>
>Then what happened with Breyer and Ginsberg? Most conservatives didn't
>hate Kerry they just didn't agree with him. I think you are wrong. I
>think the vitriol is much more potent on the Left.

I suspect you are on the right. People in general accuse the other
side of being hateful. The fans of the other team are hateful.

The reason the other political side is against me is because they are
hateful - because, obviously if they thought about it they would agree
with me. 8^)
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals? 

On 4 Feb 2006 22:33:11 -0800, "darylgene@aol.com" <darylgene.DeleteThis@aol.com>
wrote:

>I could vote for our senator, Dianne Feinstein, for president and maybe
>Joe Lieberman, but we're likely to get Clinton or someone to the left
>of her. Most Democrats are just scary to me and a lot of other people.

The Democrats may be out-of-touch enough to nominate Clinton. But
maybe they will nominate someone who can win.
 >> Stay informed about: Edmund Inundated By Animals?